|
||||||||
Ericcson sues Apple and wants iPhone ban |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the future....
Posts: 11,257
|
Ericcson sues Apple and wants iPhone ban
Ericcson sues Apple and wants iPhones banned in the USA. We all know that wont happen just ask Obama! Yet another fine example of the USA's bent and broken patent system. This time it centre's around 41 patents that Ericcson own and Apple aren't happy with the price they want to pay to continue using them. Apple are struggling to make a healthy profit you know ![]() Quote:
Ericsson, world pioneer in mobile technology and wireless communications, is filing seven lawsuits against Apple in a U.S. court, accusing it of infringing on 41 of its patents, including some "that are essential to the 2G and 4G/LTE standards", as well as patents related to the component design of Apple products, UI, location services, and iOS features. http://www.neowin.net/news/ericsson-...-the-us-market
If having to pay half a billion dollars to Smartflash sounds bad, now Ericsson is asking the International Trade Commission to ban sales of Apple's iPhone and iPad in the U.S. market. Kasim Alfalahi, Ericsson’s chief intellectual property officer, stated that “we have offered them a license; they have a turned it down.” Prior to mid-January 2015, Apple had been paying Ericsson royalties for using their patents, but the license expired, and after not being able to negotiate a renewal, the two companies proceeded to sue each other. Kristin Huguet, an Apple representative, has stated that “unfortunately, we have not been able to agree with Ericsson on a fair rate for their patents so, as a last resort, we are asking the courts for help.” Apple is accusing Ericsson of "abusive licensing practices", arguing that Ericsson “seeks to exploit its patents to take the value of cutting-edge Apple innovations”, and has refused the offer to have an arbitrator determine the proper rates for the licenses involved in their design. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wales
Posts: 4,542
|
If these companies spent as much time developing products as they do on lawsuits...
Yawn! |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Totnes, Devon
Posts: 6,693
|
Bunch of bloody children all of them!
It's like my kids in the back of the car having an argument about how one of them looked at the other. Why does it only affect the US though? |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 25,199
|
Quote:
Ericcson sues Apple and wants iPhones banned in the USA. We all know that wont happen just ask Obama! Yet another fine example of the USA's bent and broken patent system. This time it centre's around 41 patents that Ericcson own and Apple aren't happy with the price they want to pay to continue using them. Apple are struggling to make a healthy profit you know
![]() http://www.neowin.net/news/ericsson-...-the-us-market |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,209
|
Quote:
It will have to be a sick profit then. Oh,wait, it already is. And here you have it, use if it suits you, ignore when it does not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Posts: 9,292
|
Quote:
They were paying a fair price, but now Ericcson are taking the mickey. What do you expect them to do ? They are not ignoring the patents as you say, they have asked the courts help decide a fair renewal price.
Anyway, the fact is, the whole thing with patents is becoming increasingly childish from all companies these days. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 4,966
|
No big issue. Court looks at price competitors are paying, awards one party after that. Not sure why everyone gets their knickers in a twist. It's just one company thinking they could get a better deal on one of the hundreds, maybe thousands of parents they have to pay to bring you a phone like the iPhone. Folk wonder why it costs so much well some of it because of patents. Which is fine when everyone is on the same playing field but many times they are not. Apple is an easy target and hence why it defends itself regularly. If they didn't the iPhone would cost you more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,545
|
Quote:
No big issue. Court looks at price competitors are paying, awards one party after that. Not sure why everyone gets their knickers in a twist. It's just one company thinking they could get a better deal on one of the hundreds, maybe thousands of parents they have to pay to bring you a phone like the iPhone. Folk wonder why it costs so much well some of it because of patents. Which is fine when everyone is on the same playing field but many times they are not. Apple is an easy target and hence why it defends itself regularly. If they didn't the iPhone would cost you more.
It IS a big issue, patents are causing us to have to pay much more than we should for technology and stopping newer companies from coming into the market. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9,423
|
I assume if there's one thing we can be certain of, its that Apple are the bad guys in this, and every other, dispute.
I'm sure no company would try to get a better deal out any agreement it had with Apple on account of Apple's current success. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 204
|
it appears the dispute is over how the payment is based. Ericsson want it based on the cost of the handset (like apple did when they sued samsung) apple want it based on the part or parts involved.
http://9to5mac.com/2015/02/27/ericsson-itc-iphone-ban/ |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,209
|
Quote:
I assume if there's one thing we can be certain of, its that Apple are the bad guys in this, and every other, dispute.
I'm sure no company would try to get a better deal out any agreement it had with Apple on account of Apple's current success. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9,423
|
Quote:
Ericcson sues Apple and wants iPhones banned in the USA. We all know that wont happen just ask Obama! Yet another fine example of the USA's bent and broken patent system. This time it centre's around 41 patents that Ericcson own and Apple aren't happy with the price they want to pay to continue using them. Apple are struggling to make a healthy profit you know
![]() Can I just ask - in your opinion should the price Company A pays Company B for something be based on the amount of profit Company A is making? If so, why? If not, why mention it as though it is? I would genuinely be interested in your answers. Of course it may just have been a petty dig at Apple, based on absolutely nothing. But I'll remain open minded until you expand on any of the above. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9,423
|
Quote:
One thing's for sure - had it been Samsung taking Erricson to court it wouldn't have achieved a thread here.
It will be interesting to see if there is a thread about any result of any appeal in the Smartflash case though. I'm sure if there are any developments, there will be. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,146
|
I have never understood why they dont just reverse engineer there own system for the parts/tech they need
like the BIOS back in the day http://www.computerworld.com/article...gineering.html |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,342
|
Quote:
I assume if there's one thing we can be certain of, its that Apple are the bad guys in this, and every other, dispute.
. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9,423
|
Quote:
Yes agreed and largely true although I'm sure some detailed research may provide the odd exception.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,342
|
I suppose wise words again CP
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 842
|
Quote:
Apple is accusing Ericsson of "abusive licensing practices", arguing that Ericsson “seeks to exploit its patents to take the value of cutting-edge Apple innovations”, and has refused the offer to have an arbitrator determine the proper rates for the licenses involved in their design.
Yeah, like Apple have never done that before. |
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the future....
Posts: 11,257
|
Quote:
That's a knowing wink.
Can I just ask - in your opinion should the price Company A pays Company B for something be based on the amount of profit Company A is making? If so, why? If not, why mention it as though it is? I would genuinely be interested in your answers. Of course it may just have been a petty dig at Apple, based on absolutely nothing. But I'll remain open minded until you expand on any of the above. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9,423
|
Quote:
Apple are very good at negotiating with manufactures so they pay the bare minimum for components. There have been many cases where manufactures have walked away from Apple as it just wasn't worth it. With Patents its more difficult to do since they are essential for the phone to operate. Hence why its gone to court. Apple may well have wanted to pay a lot less for the Patents but Ericcson said no. Maybe Apple think they can increase profits even more by trying this sort of tactic over Patents.
My understanding is that Apple had been paying Ericcson already, but the contract ended recently, so it was up for renegotiation. At which point Ericsson want to increase the price significantly. What the true, fair price would be I have no idea - in all likelihood somewhere between the two, as would be typical in any negotiation. Having said all of that, I don't think you really answered the question, which was about your insinuation that what Apple pay should somehow be related to how much profit they make. Again, if so, why? If not, why mention it as though it is? Its not a trick question - I'm just curious as to your thinking on it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9,423
|
Quote:
I suppose wise words again CP
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: This forum
Posts: 3,389
|
Quote:
With Patents its more difficult to do since they are essential for the phone to operate.
If they're not standard essential patents, then its over to courts. |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,342
|
Quote:
Wise words? Are you kidding? Idiotic more like it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9,423
|
Quote:
I'm confused are you calling yourself an idiot, fair enough then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 204
|
Quote:
I would have thought that any company would try to negotiate the best price for anything - that much is hardly some sort of black mark against Apple.
My understanding is that Apple had been paying Ericcson already, but the contract ended recently, so it was up for renegotiation. At which point Ericsson want to increase the price significantly. What the true, fair price would be I have no idea - in all likelihood somewhere between the two, as would be typical in any negotiation. Having said all of that, I don't think you really answered the question, which was about your insinuation that what Apple pay should somehow be related to how much profit they make. Again, if so, why? If not, why mention it as though it is? Its not a trick question - I'm just curious as to your thinking on it. Thats the first I've seen BIB about that, the report i linked to suggested that this is over how the amount is worked out , not that ericsson where trying to ramp up the cost of payment,. Ive not seen that suggestion anywhere can you link to it please so i can read it. Be interesting to read it |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 13:23.




